General Discussion

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)

28. Key phrase - "eligible for other insurance"

Wed Aug 21, 2013, 02:48 PM

Aug 2013

What they are doing is cutting off spouses who have declined THEIR employer's insurance to be a spouse on the UPS employee insurance.

It is not a consequence of the ACA. It is a cost cutting measure by UPS, since full time employed spouses with other employers will have mandated coverage through THEIR employer.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

82 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

UPS dropping 15,000 spouses from health insurance. [View all] dkf Aug 2013 OP

What if the insurance is worse than UPS's? The Link Aug 2013 #1

Too bad. The spouse needs insurance or they pay the mandate penalty. dkf Aug 2013 #2

"Penalty". The Obama Administration argued before the Supreme Court that it was a tax AnotherMcIntosh Aug 2013 #43

If the spouse's policy doesn't meet ACA coverage standards, the spouse will have the option pnwmom Aug 2013 #51

Well that's what the republicans called it--- Kingofalldems Aug 2013 #69

Happened to me. Xithras Aug 2013 #17

I know of a few cases also -- the spouse is kicked off if they have "coverage" anneboleyn Aug 2013 #47

Some more misinformation about the ACA to try to dismantle it. kelliekat44 Aug 2013 #3

In this case the corporation needs the ACA... Jesus Malverde Aug 2013 #6

Look at the ALEC's list of Private Enterprise Council Members rdharma Aug 2013 #25

And this type of information and stacked deck is a suprise now. Safetykitten Aug 2013 #33

I'm surprised they have the cohones to blame their dropping coverage on the ACA rdharma Aug 2013 #44

Interesting Jesus Malverde Aug 2013 #40

ALEC's member list is a "Who's Who" of Republican scumbaggery rdharma Aug 2013 #48

Yes, this group came into existence about four hours ago. No ACA imput at all. Safetykitten Aug 2013 #58

LIES! Lies I tell you! It's all a lie and propaganda. Safetykitten Aug 2013 #18

Corporations love the idea of single payer. The object is to get healthcare off their books. NOVA_Dem Aug 2013 #21

That's a novel idea. Quantess Aug 2013 #67

Walmart and Fast Food companies already use the gov't to subsidize their salaries and healthcare.. NOVA_Dem Aug 2013 #68

I meant "corporations love the idea of single payer" was a novel idea. Quantess Aug 2013 #73

Of course healthcare companies would hate it but all the other companies would love it. NOVA_Dem Aug 2013 #74

Definitely. (no text) Quantess Aug 2013 #75

You got that right! rdharma Aug 2013 #30

Only applies to non-union employees. House of Roberts Aug 2013 #4

If the employee now has to buy outside coverage do they get a raise to pay for it? DJ13 Aug 2013 #5

LOL....of course not that would undo the added profits for snappyturtle Aug 2013 #7

That's if the wife has coverage. But I guess if not employer covered she can go to the exchanges. dkf Aug 2013 #8

That's not even a fair read of what UPS is saying jberryhill Aug 2013 #29

They will not be on UPS rolls 2014. Correct? Safetykitten Aug 2013 #34

There is a strong case for that... WCGreen Aug 2013 #23

Key phrase - "eligible for other insurance" jberryhill Aug 2013 #28

Oh, and that's a 60 million dollar saving. Got it. Safetykitten Aug 2013 #35

It's just shifting that cost onto the spouse's employer jberryhill Aug 2013 #36

And then they "other".... Safetykitten Aug 2013 #56

Ingles, por favor jberryhill Aug 2013 #60

Yes, if they are a stockholder in a health insurance company that will pay dividends. AnotherMcIntosh Aug 2013 #46

If money was deducted from a paycheck for medical coverage they should have to WCGreen Aug 2013 #76

UPS is a price gouger in just about every way. not surprised to hear this nt msongs Aug 2013 #9

The non-union employees this applies to should join their union. Robb Aug 2013 #10

They can't. They are considered management even if they to are part time or anything else. TheKentuckian Aug 2013 #16

Sometimes I like fantasy scenarios also. Safetykitten Aug 2013 #37

Good malaise Aug 2013 #11

The corp is lying. This has nothing to do with the ACA. Companies have always been pnwmom Aug 2013 #12

Anything bad that happens to UPS management puts a smile on my face. Skeeter Barnes Aug 2013 #13

Many "management" positions pay well below "non-management" jobs joeglow3 Aug 2013 #19

I'm quite familiar with how things work at UPS. Skeeter Barnes Aug 2013 #26

Bull shit joeglow3 Aug 2013 #42

When did I ever say anything about how much somebody makes? "Bull shit". Get lost, creep. Skeeter Barnes Aug 2013 #45

So you take joy in a pennyless person losing benefits joeglow3 Aug 2013 #49

I take joy in the misfortune of people that hate Unions and work against them every day. Skeeter Barnes Aug 2013 #52

EVERY SINGLE PERSON there harassed and/or tried to fire Teamsters? joeglow3 Aug 2013 #62

Well if they didn't do that then I was obviously not referring to them. I was specific in my Skeeter Barnes Aug 2013 #63

You said "Anything bad that happens to UPS management puts a smile on my face." joeglow3 Aug 2013 #64

Even after you barged in hollering "Bull shit" and throwing around your lofty credentials, Skeeter Barnes Aug 2013 #65

Or, as a nation and customers, lets demand it of all companies joeglow3 Aug 2013 #66

Tell that to management, not me. I've been for single payer for years. Skeeter Barnes Aug 2013 #72

You can put me on ignore joeglow3 Aug 2013 #81

When did I mention workers at other companies? Skeeter Barnes Aug 2013 #82

wait what? They require employers to cover employees and children but not spouses? Why did they liberal_at_heart Aug 2013 #14

First they came for the pensions, then they exported jobs, now they are coming for your benefits. kenny blankenship Aug 2013 #15

... Safetykitten Aug 2013 #20

most likely they are cutting costs to make sure they don't have a "cadillac" plan FarCenter Aug 2013 #22

Cadillac plan? HangOnKids Aug 2013 #31

"Cadillac" plans are plans exceeding cost limits above which employers pay a penalty FarCenter Aug 2013 #50

Newsmax? Really? HangOnKids Aug 2013 #53

Do you even understand the basics of the ACA? Safetykitten Aug 2013 #55

Well yes Kitten I do HangOnKids Aug 2013 #57

If you don't like that source, use Google yourself... FarCenter Aug 2013 #59

I did use Goggle I was asking why you used that source HangOnKids Aug 2013 #61

I think a few are misunderstanding this - spouses won't be covered only if eligible elsewhere groundloop Aug 2013 #24

But is anyone not covered if they can go to the exchanges? dkf Aug 2013 #27

Anyone can buy health insurance without the exchanges jberryhill Aug 2013 #32

Exactly.. Few people are old enough to recall that once upon a time SoCalDem Aug 2013 #41

They spend billions to track their employees with telematics but justify this by claiming Skeeter Barnes Aug 2013 #38

Surprise, Surprise, Surprise! Puzzledtraveller Aug 2013 #39

No Way! Safetykitten Aug 2013 #54

Treating their employees like their parcels; at least they're consistent. (nt) Posteritatis Aug 2013 #70

My former employer did this three years ago mcar Aug 2013 #71

My wife's employer tried to pull that crap on me earlier this year Generic Brad Aug 2013 #77

Contract time Shibainu Aug 2013 #78

They can now pay the tax for the priviledge of dying Riftaxe Aug 2013 #79

So what's your plan? Kingofalldems Aug 2013 #80